Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1738 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
10 month(s) 12 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
04-12-2020
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
D
Next Hearing Date
-
Assessment Year
2012-2013
Appeal Filed On
22-01-2020
Judgement Text
T HE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ( A M) & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (JM) M.A. NO. 165/MUM/2020 ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO. 5980 /MUM/ 201 6 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13 ) ARCH PHARMALABS LTD. H - WINGH, 4 TH FLOOR TEX CENTRE, OPP. S AKI VIHAR ROAD, CHANDIVALI ANDHERI - EAST MUMBAI - 400 072. PAN : AACCM0306Q V S . DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 5(1) AIR INDIA BUILDING NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI - 400 021. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAJIV KHANDELWAL DEPARTMENT BY SHRI RAJENDRA JOSH I DATE OF HEARING 04 . 1 2 . 20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04 . 1 2 . 20 20 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) : - BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ASSESSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION O F MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THIS T RIB UNAL IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 5980/MU M/2016 BY THE ORDER DATED 22.5.2019. 2. W E HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUN SE L AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT IN THE SAID INCOME TAX APPEAL THE ITAT HAS REJECTED THE ASSESSEES REQUEST OF ADJOURNMENT AT THE DESIGNATED DATE OF HEARING. IT IS THE COUN SE L OF THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION THAT LEARNED CIT (A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL WITHOUT ADJUDICATING THE ISSUES RAISED O N THE GROUND THAT TAXES AS PER SECTION 249 (4) HAD NOT BEEN PAID. THE LEARNED COUNSEL CONTENDS THAT THERE ARE CASE LAWS THAT IF THE SAID FEES IS PAID UPTO THE DATE OF HEARING BY ITAT , IN THE SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST OF JUSTICE, LEARNED CIT (A) CAN BE DIRECTED TO HEAR THE APPEAL. IN THE PRESENT CASE COUNSEL CONTENDS THAT ASSESSEE HAD PAID ALMOST 90% OF THE TA XES AND ONLY THE SMALL AMOUNT WAS 2 REMAINING. THIS ALSO HAS BEEN PAID. HENCE LEARNED COUNSEL CONTENDS THAT THERE HAS BEEN A GREAT MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE BY THE REFUSAL TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT AN D UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF LD CIT( A ). 3. PER CONTRA LEARNED DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT HAVE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION IN THE PLEA OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE . 4. U PON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE WAS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN AS MUCH AS IT HA D REJECTED THE ASSESSEES REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT AND NOT NOTED THAT SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF PAY MENT OF THE IMPUGNED TAXES HAD ALREADY BEEN DONE BY THE DATE AND A VERY SMALL AMOUNT WAS REMAINING . ACCORDINGLY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE RECALL THE AFORES AID ORDER OF THE T RIBUNAL FOR FRESH HEARING . T HE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 10 TH DECEMBER 2020 . 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED UNDER RULE 34(4) OF THE ITAT RULES BY PLACING THE RESU LT ON NOTICE BOARD ON 04.12.2020. SD/ - SD/ - (AMARJIT SINGH) (SH A MIM YAHYA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 04 / 1 2 / 20 20 COPY OF THE ORDER FO RWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ) PS ITAT, MUMBAI
Mehul